Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf

Citation: Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
Jurisdiction: Washington (state)
Source verification: official_capture_completeness_unverified
Original Source: https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/389189_pub.pdf ↗

Related Parts of This Source

Full Text

1,174 chars

https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/crt/legacy/2010/12/14/joint_statement_ra.pdf

27
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.

No. 38918-9-III
Kiemle & Hagood Co. v. Daniels

[https://perma.cc/SG47-BGKG]. 7 Similarly, the Washington State Human Rights

Commission has also recognized that “[i]f a person has a visible disability and their

request is reasonably tied to their disability, then no further verification is needed.”

Wash. State Hum. Rts. Comm’n, Disability in Housing, https://www.hum.wa.gov/fair-

housing/disability-housing (emphasis added).

We agree with Ms. Daniels and amicus curiae the Attorney General of Washington

that third-party verification of a tenant’s disability is unwarranted when a tenant’s

disability is obvious or otherwise known to the landlord.

Ms. Daniels has presented ample evidence of an obvious disability that was known

to her landlord. Not only did Ms. Daniels testify that she told K&H employees about the

disability to her back, it would be obvious to anyone who looked at her that she had a

physical impairment. Although she was not required to do so, Ms. Daniels voluntarily